So it's either really good and I should just submit it, or it's so bad you don't know where to start.All I need is some feedback. If you want to say that my PS smells funny you can, as long as you tell me why.

2) your first actual paragraph sets it up to be about overcoming the adversity you've felt for being gay, not about accepting and giving different perspectives.

3) I feel like you're walking on eggshells around the religious aspect of the PS... and probably with good reason. It makes it weaker, though.

4) when you talk about the bible study sessions you bring up 'moral questions'... maybe you should extrapolate as to why being gay has given you a different perspective on general morality that has set you apart from Christians. I don't see the connection other than the most obvious. Also, the stealing analogy is really cliche and not a particularly strong moral dilemma, imo. Perhaps if you talked to them about someone who has done everything right in the eyes of God, but still has been subjected to horrible event after horrible event.

I think the key take-away is that you don't explain why you have a different perspective. Being gay doesn't necessarily grant you it. How are you different? What has made you that way? If it is being subjected to ridicule and living in secrecy, talk more about that. I don't think you're showing through what you want to show through. I might drop the bible study thing, if I were you, unless you can actually show us how you influenced them and how they influenced you.

I kind of wanted to be a dick and make fun of your personal statement as essentially being about how you were smarter than christians. But I will try to be a bit more constructive. first:

I see two themes:

Being gay has been tough

I am smarter than christians

Not quite sure how they relate. I would also like to point out that there is an irony in your PS in that you implicitly accuse christianity of being black and white. but you seem extremely black and white in your views of religion... There are christian churches that are queer positive and many people who attend even conservative churches don't hold such black and white views.

I am an also an atheist but I spent summers working in a conservative Christian company (we prayed before work). While we certainly had some lively discussions about abortion, homophobia etc. I'm sure I learned as much from them as they did from me. The level of honesty (it was a production based industry where 'overclaiming' your own production is rampant) integrity and genuine willingness to help out anyone and everyone in the company was astounding, and taught me a lot about why people are attracted to religion.

What I'm trying to say is that you come off as a little self aggrandizing and belittling of religion. you really do not want to sound that way.

- also i don't think your example is really as airtight as it seems. maybe its still not okay for them to sin (steal) whether rationally justified or not. Maybe its better to starve as a saint then live as a sinner. Also depending on the interpretation of theology stealing in a situation that causes no harm might not even be considered a sin.

All I'm saying is that religion is more complicated and "grayer" than you give credit for

It's okay as a unified PS/DS. Doesn't present you as mature, although it does suggest that you have emerged from adolescence and are developing adult perspectives. Overall this PS/DS will help your application to those law schools aggressively seeking diversity.

2) your first actual paragraph sets it up to be about overcoming the adversity you've felt for being gay, not about accepting and giving different perspectives.

3) I feel like you're walking on eggshells around the religious aspect of the PS... and probably with good reason. It makes it weaker, though.

4) when you talk about the bible study sessions you bring up 'moral questions'... maybe you should extrapolate as to why being gay has given you a different perspective on general morality that has set you apart from Christians. I don't see the connection other than the most obvious. Also, the stealing analogy is really cliche and not a particularly strong moral dilemma, imo. Perhaps if you talked to them about someone who has done everything right in the eyes of God, but still has been subjected to horrible event after horrible event.

I think the key take-away is that you don't explain why you have a different perspective. Being gay doesn't necessarily grant you it. How are you different? What has made you that way? If it is being subjected to ridicule and living in secrecy, talk more about that. I don't think you're showing through what you want to show through. I might drop the bible study thing, if I were you, unless you can actually show us how you influenced them and how they influenced you.

Yeah, I'm trying not to be too be really careful with the whole religious aspect as it can be one of those inflammatory topics. I was on the fence about that paragraph and I think I'm going to get rid of it.The point of the quote was to set the tone of the PS but then others thought I should to talk more about the diversity stuff and I thought I made it work but apparently not. Hopefully with the new paragraph I'll be able to address that issue

Saltqjibo wrote:I kind of wanted to be a dick and make fun of your personal statement as essentially being about how you were smarter than christians. But I will try to be a bit more constructive. first:

I see two themes:

Being gay has been tough

I am smarter than christians

Not quite sure how they relate. I would also like to point out that there is an irony in your PS in that you implicitly accuse christianity of being black and white. but you seem extremely black and white in your views of religion... There are christian churches that are queer positive and many people who attend even conservative churches don't hold such black and white views.

I am an also an atheist but I spent summers working in a conservative Christian company (we prayed before work). While we certainly had some lively discussions about abortion, homophobia etc. I'm sure I learned as much from them as they did from me. The level of honesty (it was a production based industry where 'overclaiming' your own production is rampant) integrity and genuine willingness to help out anyone and everyone in the company was astounding, and taught me a lot about why people are attracted to religion.

What I'm trying to say is that you come off as a little self aggrandizing and belittling of religion. you really do not want to sound that way.

- also i don't think your example is really as airtight as it seems. maybe its still not okay for them to sin (steal) whether rationally justified or not. Maybe its better to starve as a saint then live as a sinner. Also depending on the interpretation of theology stealing in a situation that causes no harm might not even be considered a sin.

All I'm saying is that religion is more complicated and "grayer" than you give credit for

First of all, being a dick is always welcomed The theme I tried to convey was that through a little discourse people are able to grow, but apparently I failedI thought I wasn't being to hard on Christians since I said that only a few are like that. I also don't think I put them all in one neat little box, but if that's how it sounds like, I'll change it.I think its funny how one thinks I'm being too careful and another thinks I'm being too harsh on regards to religion

CanadianWolf wrote:It's okay as a unified PS/DS. Doesn't present you as mature, although it does suggest that you have emerged from adolescence and are developing adult perspectives. Overall this PS/DS will help your application to those law schools aggressively seeking diversity.

Funny you should mention it. There are a couple of good schools who are sending me stuff for that exact reasonHow does it seem I'm immature? I really need to change that

Bible session theme has promise, but it doesn't seem to specifically relate to your sexual identity. As currently presented, it's somewhat irrelevant. You need to tie the book session back to your sexuality. The essay also has a number of grammatical errors (using "been" instead of "being," misplaced commas, using "means" out of context, etc.).

An acceptable rough draft, but needs serious revision.

Edit: You don''t come off as harsh on churchgoers; you don't generalize or name-call and make all the necessary qualifications when discussing particularly bigoted groups.

The problem with your anecdote about the Bible class is your detailed explanation of your hypothetical situation which suggests that you see yourself as intellectually superior to the other class attendees. My impression is that they may have feigned agreement with your point of view as a courtesy to a guest & out of respect for your right to express your opinion. Your failure to recognize that possibility reveals more about you than about them.Another concern might be that your essay can be read as stereotyping religion & religious viewpoints--which is something that schools seeking diversity seek to combat whether regarding religion, nationality, race, ethnicity, socio-economic status or sexuality.

Last edited by CanadianWolf on Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

CanadianWolf wrote:The problem with your anecdote about the Bible class is your detailed explanation of your hypothetical situation which suggests that you see yourself as intellectually superior to the other class attendees. My impression is that they may have feigned agreement with your point of view as a courtesy to a guest & out of respect for your right to express your opinion. Your failure to recognize that possibility reveals more about you than about them.

point taken. People are known of doing that to me. I guess I should explain that better and not go into too much detail. The point of doing that was to show that I know more than just US stuff, but at this point, that doesn't fit anywhere.

Last edited by gin on Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

No. Writing that an intellectual discussion about religion & morals lasting a mere 40 minutes resulted in conclusory findings indicates a lack of thoughtful reflection about others' points of view--especially when those viewpoints have survived many cultures over a couple thousand years.

Did anyone mention the 3 or so typos? Do you want me to? If it is a rough draft I will let them go...

Also: I agree that it has potential but there is a immaturity to the delivery. Simplify and polish that dialogue with the church down to a sentence or two that just says you came to an understanding with them during a debate..

And it is very loose at the end with the crowbarring in of the judiciary issue. Stay focused my son.

What exactly is the statement in this personal statement? SAY IT. In one sentence tell me what your point is. Then, let's see if your existing PS clearly supports that.

CanadianWolf wrote:No. Writing that an intellectual discussion about religion & morals lasting a mere 40 minutes resulted in conclusory findings indicates a lack of thoughtful reflection about others' points of view--especially when those viewpoints have survived many cultures over a couple thousand years.

I actually would disagree with that. Whether something has stood the test of time is completely irrelevant if we do not consider why it has stood the test of time. But I have the feeling that on this specific issue we'll just have to agree to disagree.@Saltqjibo Here I am beating on religion

2807 wrote:I scanned the responses. I read the PS.

Did anyone mention the 3 or so typos? Do you want me to? If it is a rough draft I will let them go...

Also: I agree that it has potential but there is a immaturity to the delivery. Simplify and polish that dialogue with the church down to a sentence or two that just says you came to an understanding with them during a debate..

And it is very loose at the end with the crowbarring in of the judiciary issue. Stay focused my son.

What exactly is the statement in this personal statement? SAY IT. In one sentence tell me what your point is. Then, let's see if your existing PS clearly supports that.

Can you say it in one sentence?

The whole idea was to present the argument that being exposed to different points of view can have helped me develop into the person I am today and it can help society advance.By the looks of it, I ended up accomplishing the opposite of that. The last one was a lot more focused but if I had to guess, I would say that talking about the diversity thing caused it to go astray, but people thought it would be a good idea to talk about that.The problem I run into if I get rid of that is that I run the risk of making it sound as one of my philosophy papers with me as (a rather bad) example

The whole idea was to present the argument that: "Being exposed to different points of view helped me develop into the person I am today, and I can help society advance because of it."

This is clear

Now, clearly expand this. And come on back for more.

Remember-- it is "the person I am today" portion and how he can "help society advance" that you will be defining and talking about. NOT all the background and precise recitations of dialogue. Discuss your metamorphosis from what you were to what you are and how that experience serves to balance you, guide you and define you..

You have a good foundation. You are learning how these PS's are difficult because you have limited space. THAT is the challenge! Stay focused and you will be fine. Think "does this next sentence jive with my overall theme of my statement" (or am I expanding too far). Then, reign yourself in.